« السابقةمتابعة »
evasions of the Turner law on this subject, and on the other proposed remedying its deficient and defective provisions by due amendment.
EVENING SESSION. — EIGHT O'CLOCK. Paper on “ Tuberculosis, its Origin, Detection, and Control," by D. E. Salmon, D. V. M., chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry, Washington, D. C.
Paper on “ Some Observations on the Origin and Sources of Disease Germs,” by Theobald Smith, M. D., of the bacteriological laboratory of the Bureau of Animal Industry, Washington, D. C.
Paper on “ Meteorological Observations as respects Disease Prevalence," by Prof. W. W. Payne, director of the observatory, Northfield, Minn.
Dr. D. E. Salmon, with the aid of the stereopticon, showed the bacillus latterly assumed to be the cause of, as it certainly is the concomitant characteristic of, tuberculosis in human as well as animal organisms. The subject was invested with interest · from the fact that 131,000 is the computed mortality from
what is termed “consumption " during the current year in the United States. While technically precise and scientifically accurate throughout, the doctor's paper yet treated the subject in a popularly instructive manner. The bacillus was shown to enter the human organism not by direct transference from one person to another, but on the one hand through the air and water we all consume, surcharged as they are with the dust of human and animal secretions and excretions, and on the other by much of the beef and milk that despite its infected condition finds a ready market. Little hope was held out for the attainment of even a measurable control of the disease except by stamping it out in cattle.
Dr. Theobald Smith's paper had evidently been compiled with much erudition, and some of the deductions made seemed to furnish very plausible and helpful working theories for bacteriologists.
Chairman C. A. Lindsley, of the Lomb prize committee, announced the award of the first prize, $500, to that essay on hygienic dietetics superscribed with the motto “Five Food Principles, Illustrated by Practical Recipes.” On opening the sealed envelope, it was found that the successful author was Mary Hinman Abel, wife of Dr. John J. Abel, now resident at Strasburg, Germany, where husband and wife are attending the university. The second prize was not awarded.
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 23.
The closing meeting of the association was mainly given to routine work. Reports from special committees were heard and acted upon, and the report of the advisory council was adopted, the following officers being elected: President, H. A. Johnson, M. D., Chicago ; vice-presidents, Jerome Cochran, M. D., Mobile, and F. Montizambert, M. D., Quebec; secretary, I. A. Watson, M. D., Concord, N. H.; treasurer, J. Berrien Lindsley, M. D., Nashville, Tenn.
Adjourned to meet in Brooklyn, N. Y., on Tuesday, October 22, 1889.
A few suspected cases of poisoning from arsenical wall-paper were reported to the board during the year. One case came to the knowledge of Prof. E. R. Angell, who communicated the facts and also transmitted a sample of the paper. The following is a copy of his letter regarding this case :
Derry, N. H., April 6, 1889. Dr. Watson :
DEAR SIR, – This piece of wall-paper inclosed contains arsenic at the rate of 2.96 grains per square yard. A neighbor's house has several rooms papered with it. His daughter has been complaining for some time of not feeling well, a difficulty of the throat and other ill feelings. His daughter keeps house for him and is the only person who remains in the house most of the time, and her sleeping-room is papered with the same.
Finally they became convinced that the paper might be the cause of her illness. From the results obtained there can be no doubt that the suspicion was rightly placed. I presume there are many instances of ill-heath from the same cause throughout the State, if any one knew where to look for them I suppose many fabrics, calicoes, etc., contain arsenic.
I wish there might be some way of getting at the kinds of papers and fabrics which are in the market throughout the State and which might be open to suspicion. As a member of the local board of health, I would look up this matter in our town if I were certain it was within the jurisdiction of the board. Have we the right and power to do so ?
Yours very truly,
EDMUND R. ANGELL.
A piece of paper taken from the wall of a room occupied by a young lady in this city, who had a suspicion that she might be getting poisonous effects from the paper, was sent to Professor Angell for examination, upon which he reported as follows:
The sample sent contains 0.165 grain of arsenic per square yard. The quantity is so small, I do not know whether it was an intentional addition to the paper coloring matter, or whether that amount might be received from the other materials used in its manufacture. However, the test gives the “ eight to pica” line mentioned on page 265, Fifth Annual Report State Board of Health, Lunacy, and Charity, Massachusetts, 1883. I shall keep all the results so they may be compared.
With a view of examining into this subject somewhat further than it has been convenient to do the present year, the secretary collected eight samples of wall-paper from one residence, which must have been put on between five and ten years ago, and twenty samples from the shelves of a retail store in this city, and sent the lot to Prof. Angell for examination. The paper selected from the retail store was from among all grades, and of a great variety of shades and colors. The following is the report rendered by Prof. Angell :
DERRY, N. H., May 25, 1889. Dr. Watson: DEAR SIR, — Below you will find report on the papers tested for arsenic:
square yard. No. I contains
2.96 0.16 1.58 0.17 0.39 1.05 Trace 1.85
0.46 . . . . . . . . 0.33
· · ·
Nos. II to 30 contain no more per sample that 72 grain per piece of the size 12 yards long and 21 inches wide, the quantity which was thought to be allowable for the arsenic naturally contained in the dyes and chemicals used in printing the papers. No. 30 gave no sublimate in the glass tube, being absolutely free from arsenic.
I send you by this mail the tubes containing the sublimates of the tests from No. 11 to No. 29, except No. 18, which was about the same as No. 24. Each of the tubes is numbered. I also send two tubes, labeled but not numbered, which contain sublimates obtained from a known quantity of arsenic, the same quantity as a piece of paper 4 inches square would contain to make the whole strip (12 yards by 21 inches) contain just 72 grain. By comparing the tubes you can readily see that the tubes from the paper tests indicate no more arsenic, some of them very much less.
Yours very truly,
EDMUND R. ANGELL. It will be seen from the above that the samples (Nos. 3 to 10 inclusive) obtained from the residence referred to, all contained arsenic in varying quantities, while the samples (Nos. 11 to 30 inclusive) obtained at the retail store contained but a trace of this poison.
These examinations are, of course, very limited, and hence no inference of value can be drawn, although it suggests that possibly there is now much less arsenical paper in the market than formerly. The reports that have been made in other States upon this subject doubtless have induced some manufacturers to seek a less dangerous substitute.
The American Pharmaceutical Association took up the subject at its last meeting, and it was considered of sufficient importance to refer it to the American Public Health Association, that steps might be taken to secure the proper legislation.
The following is from the transactions of the American Pharmaceutical Association, advance sheets of which were forwarded to this board :
ARSENIC IN WALL-PAPER.
QUERY No. 39. — In what quantity and to what extent is arsenic present in wall-paper? Is the public health thereby in any degree affected ?
BY D. H. GALLOWAY. A large number of samples of wall-paper were obtained from many different sources, paper-hangers, stores, imported samples,
and from friends, those from the latter being papers already upon their walls or about to be put on.
I made a determination of the arsenic in 100 samples. These samples were taken at random, and included all colors, styles, figures, and prices, the latter ranging from four cents to two dollars per roll, and some that were sold by the yard at a much higher price.
When I began this work, nearly a year ago, I supposed that after a time I should be able to tell by appearance whether a paper contained arsenic or not. This expectation has not, however, been realized, and I am now convinced that it is impossible to say, before examination, whether a given sample contains arsenic or not.
The following table gives the amount of arsenic, estimated as As,Og in one square meter of each paper examined :
3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 24, 29, 38, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 72, 75,
84, 89, 91, 92, 95, (24) . . . . . . 23, 28, 30, 37, 39, 42, 43, 57, 62, 69, 70, 71, 76, 78, 85, 86, 87, 88,
90, 93 · · · · · · · · · · 14, 25, 74, 83 . 73, 84 . . . . 10, 33, 66, 67, 82 . . 22, 63, 65, 99 . . 54, 55, 59, 61, 96 . . 13, 26, 32, 40, 53, 64, 68, 97 . 77. . . . . . 17, 18, 20, 21, 31, 34, 58, 98 . 36, 60, 79 · · ·
. . . . . . 7 . 41 . . . . . . . . .